til ^ / /"^-'^ /^^' '^ 






7^ 



LETTER 

TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE STORY, LL. D., 

DISCOVJERING AND CORRECTING THE 

ERRORS OF BLACKSTONE AND HIS EDITORS, 

ON THE 

THEORY OF HUMAN GENEALOGY AND KINDRED, 

AND DESTROYING THE CONCOMITANT FALLACIOUS 

INDUCTIONS OF ETERNAL PRE-EXISTING POPULATION, 

AND THE 

PHYSICAL NECESSITY OF CRIME, 

BY THE 

DOCTRINE OF INFINITE SERIES: 

WITH REMARKS ON THE 

NUPTIAL CONNECTIONS OF THE FIRSJ HUMAN GENERATION. 

By JOHN LEE, 

Author of ' Proportional Formulae,' ' Theory of Longitude,' ' A Letter on the 
Fallacy of the Rectangular Survey,' and ' A Letter to the President 
of the United States, on the Mathematical Determina- 
tion of the Disputed American Frontier.' 



J " Ou} TtsQ ipvUmv Ysvsij, roi^ds xai avd^oiv. 

■ <l>tiX2.a rix jj,iv' ■t' avsfiCg ^(a^iuSig ;ftai, aXXa di &" vhi 

' TjjXi66(aaa <pvii, saqag S' iTtiy'iYvstai wQV' 

'Sig ocvSqwv yiVST], ')] (isv (pvii ^S' anoXt^Y^i--" 

Iliad, Lib. vi. 

" Behold, the nations are as a drop of a bucket, and are counted as the 
small dust of the balance." — Isaiah, xl. 15. 



CAMBRIDGE. 

METCALF, TORRY, AND BALLOU. 

1840. 

I w\<?' . - - ' ^. 

' — —' 






ey/vC- tA/'yMJiyy 4f ^ri^ /^ 



iu4rw>yi' I ^aZp Cyi 




Lo, A^ "^'/>t- ImUj 



H^C!^^ 



if-: 



LETTER 

TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE STORY, LL. D., 

DISCOVERING AND CORRECTING THE 

ERRORS OF BLACKSTONE AND HIS EDITORS, 

ON THE 

THEORY OF HUMAN GENEALOGY AND KINDRED, 

AND DESTROYING THE CONCOMITANT FALLACIOUS 

INDUCTIONS OF ETERNAL PRE-EXISTING POPULATION, 

AND THE 

PHYSICAL NECESSITY OF CRIME, 

BY THE 

;V DOCTRINE OF INFINITE SERIES: 

/ WITH REMARKS ON THE 

NUPTIAL CONNECTIONS OF THE FIRST HUMAN GENERATION. 

B Y J O H N' lee, 

Author of ' Proportional FormulEe,' ' Theory of Longitude,' ' A Letter on the 
Fallacy of the Rectangular Survey,' and ' A Letter to the President 
of the United States, on the Mathematical Determina- 
tion of the Disputed American Frontier.' 



" Oi?; ntQ (fvkXtav ysvcij, Ton'/Ss y.al (xvSqojv. 

4>v).i.a ra fiiv •t' avciiog ;fa,uaJtff >f"') oiXXa Si 6^ tiXij 

Tt}Xi66ii3Ga (pvtt, saqag 6^ tTciyiyvsrai oiQV- 

'SI? avSqiov ysvtij, j; ficv ^vti i^d' aTroAt/ysi." 

Iliad, Lib. vi. 

" Behold, the nations are as a drop of a bucket, and are counted as the 
small dust of the balance." — Isaiah, xl. 15. /A^Y-^''''' 



CAMBRIDGE: 

METCALF, TORRY, AND BALLOU. 
1840. 






Entered according to act of Congress, in the year 1840, by Metcalf, Torry, and 
Ballou, in the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the District of Massa- 
chusetts. 



A LETTER 

TO THE HON. JUDGE STORY, 



Sir, 

The narrow and severe limits of pecuniary necessity com- 
pel me, in this letter, to prepare my introductory address with 
painful and laborious brevity. 

The publication of this Letter is attributable chiefly, and 
almost exclusively, to the liberality of students in Cambridge. 
A small number of gentlemen, who are not connected with 
Harvard University, have also lent their aid. Among that 
number I am able to include, with sincere satisfaction and 
pleasure, my distinguished countryman, Mr. Grattan, and also 
his son, both resident in Boston. 

I am not anxious to induce, by the foregoing statement, a 
hasty inference of illiherality now existing among the incor- 
porated fraternity of Cambridge. An opposite inference will 
clearly result from a statement of the following facts. 

In that respectable old volume which is generally known 
by the title of the Sacred Scriptures, we find, in Chapter 
xiv. 22, one Jeremiah propounding the question — " Are 
there any among the vanities of the Gentiles that can cause 
rain 1 " This was a decisive question in his day, but his 
knowledge was not matured by experience. 

Not long ago, an illustrious manufacturer of " Winds and 
Rains made ready to order " demanded of the American gov- 
ernment an opportunity to bless the democratic soil with 
celestial irrigation. Doubtful of his powers, but struck with 



secret and portentous dread of the disastrous results of refusal, 
the government obeyed — sub modo ; that is, the quantity 
of soil, allowable for public utility and individual recompense, 
was made proportional to the quantity of irrigated land in the 
first case of experiment. 

The superhuman chemist, insulted and offended, withdrew 
to the academic shades of Harvard University. He convened, in 
the open Courthouse, the congregated multitudes around him j 
and on the bare announcement of his majestic and sublime 
speculations, he was thronged, visited, and frequented, in pri- 
vate solemnity and public state, by the populous nobility of 
Cambridge. 

Volumes are stated in the foregoing facts. Concerning the 
liberality and literature of Cambridge need I say more ? 

Having now, Sir, conferred, in fee-simple, on the philosoph- 
ical annals of Cambridge, the perpetual praise and admiration 
of posterity, I proceed, according to the purport of this letter, 
to examine and rectify the genealogical errors of the illustrious 
Blackstone. 

To accomplish this purpose, the first necessary step is to 
state Sir William Blackstone's own theory of human descents, 
which may be found in his Commentaries, Vol. I. Book H. 
Chap. XIV. No. 203 to 207. This theory I shall represent 
in a tabular diagram. But in order to shun the prolixity of 
names written at length, I shall adopt the following more con- 
cise method of designation by letters. Represent Blackstone's 
u Propositus,''^ or person supposed to be now alive, by Z , or 
if that person be a female, and therefore a Proposita, repre- 
sent her by z. As the sex of this person is, however, alto- 
gether immaterial in this question, I shall confine these inves- 
tigations to the case of the Propositus. Denote Z^s father 
by Y, and Z's mother by y ; denote y's father by X, and 
y's mother by x ; also denote Y's father by W, and Y's 
mother by w ; and so continually back ; always denoting the 
males by capitals, and the females by small letters. Now if 
we arrange these alphabetic symbols in parallel ranks repre- 



senting the several consecutive generations, the representative 
rank of each succeedijig generation being placed under that 
of the preceding one ; we can exhibit Blackstone's Table in 
the following simple alphabetical diagram. 

&c. &c. &c. &c. 

Kk LI Mm Nn Oo Pp aq Rr 

Ss Tt Uu Vv 

Ww Xx 

Yy 

Z. 

In stating the foregoing theory, and explaining its details 
with laborious exactitude, Sir William Blackstone seems to 
have rushed upon the inevitable precipice of atheistical absur- 
dity in which it eventuates, totally unconscious of his danger 
and his doom. One of his annotators has perceived the yawning 
gulf, and retreating a few feeble steps to a new position, has 
rashly presumed himself in safety. For I shall soon show, 
that, by taking into notice the very circumstance on which 
he has relied for the means of escape from the difficulty, he 
has unbarred the portals of the human understanding to a 
quadruple array of appalling, though imaginary horrors, and 
a newly accumulated host of those fantastic and frightful de- 
lusions which may well be represented as the Gorgons of the 
brain. But first it is proper to state, in explicit language, 
the general nature of the points of difficulty. This I shall do 
in the course and progress of the following articles. 

Art. 1. Z having sprung from two parents, Y and y, we 
cannot, without a supposition of incestuous connection, sup- 
pose Y and y to have sprung from the same father, or the 
same mother ; Y and y having, therefore, two parents each, 
and all distinct from each other, the total of that rank of 
parents must be four. In like manner, assigning two parents 
to each individual of that rank, the multitude of their im- 
mediate progenitors will be eight; and that of their imme- 



diate progenitors will be sixteen, &c. ; so that each preceding 
rank amounts to double the multitude of the succeeding one. 

Art. 2. That peculiar case in which Y and y, the parents 
of Z, are supposed to be hath created, is not considered in 
this investigation ; being a case which cannot have occur- 
red for several thousand years. 

Art. 3. But, independently of the authority of divine rev- 
elation, we should perceive a manifest inconsistency'' and 
absurdity in supposing that one of the parents Y and y, 
was created, and the other begotten. We must therefore 
suppose them both to have been begotten. 

Art. 4. Now, of the preceding rank, W, w, X, x, the sup- 
position, as before, is inadmissible, that a part of their 
number was created, and the remaining part begotten ; and 
the supposition, that all four were created,', is also inadmissi- 
ble ; therefore all four were begotten. And the same reason- 
ing will apply to all the preceding ranks. 

Art. 5. Now as all the individuals of each rank have been 
begotten, the existence of those individuals requires, of ne- 
cessity, the previous existence of all the ranks of their im- 
mediate progenitors ; that is, the existence of each particular 
rank presupposes the previous existence of a preceding rank, 
whose multitude is double that of the said particular rank. 
Therefore the existence of Z implies, by necessity, the pre- 
existence of two persons, whose existence also implies, by a 
like necessity, the pre-existence of four persons ; and their 
existence implies the pre-existence of eight, &c. 

Art. 6. Axiom. If any finite number whatever be se- 
lected, and denoted by 2 ; we can select among the terms of 
the unlimited progression, 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, &c., a term 
greater than 2. 

Art. 7. Now, if we acknowledge the veracity of those 
records which are commonly believed to be sacred, the ex- 
istence of the human race on the terrestrial globe had a 
commencement; and, by the same authority, that race began 
with two persotis ; therefore, down to the moment of Z's 



decease, the whole multitude of human beings, that had ever 
existed on the earth, must have amounted to a marvellously 
great, but yet finite number, — which denote by s. That 
such number cannot have been infinite, will appear from 
this ; that, for sotne time, at least, after the creation, the 
number of all human beings was only finite ; and if after 
that time, such number became infinite; then, if taken at 
the moment when that time expired, we find the number of 
all human beings, down to that moment, finite, but, in the 
next e?isuing moment, grown to be infinite by the mere act 
of propagation — which is absurd. 

Art. 8. Now, by Art. 6, we can select, among the several 
consecutive ranks of the progenitors of Z, some rank more 
numerous than 2 ; from which circumstance, combined with 
Art. 5, we infer, that, from the bare fact of the existence of 
Z, we are compelled to conclude, that a single generation of 
his progenitors must have existed on the earth, amounting 
to a greater multitude than that of all human beings that 
had ever existed on the earth, if the Mosaic records be cred- 
ited. Here, then, the Mosaic records and this theory di- 
rectly clash and are at issue — and this is the first point of 
the difficulty. 

Art. 9. We may now observe, that, from the first moment 
of existence of any propagated human being ; that is, from 
the moment of conception, some length of time must of 
necessity elapse, before that human being, then propagated, 
shall be able to propagate in turn. The ensuing argument 
will be equally elTective, whether that period of necessary 
delay be supposed to be a thousand years, a century, a half- 
century, ten years, one year, a month, a week, a day, an 
hour, a minute, or even a single second of time. As the fact 
is, however, we may safely suppose it, at least, equal to 
seven years ; for that supposition, when the time of gestation 
is deducted, will not allow much more than six years from 
the moment of birth. But whatever be the actual length of 
this necessary period of delay, denote it by 0. 



8 

Art. 10. Now, as the existence of Z by propagation pre- 
supposes the existence of Y and y, and also, by Arts. 2 and 
3, presupposes their propagation ; and as, in like manner, by 
Arts. 4 and 5, their propagation presupposes the propagation 
of W, Wj X, X, and so continually back ; then, the propagation 
of Z presupposes the prior propagation of Y, and also, prior 
to both, it presupposes that of W the parent of Y, and, prior 
to all three, that of S the parent of W ; and so continually 
back through an infinite succession. And the purpose of the 
argument will equally be answered, whether the line of pro- 
genitors be taken, as in this case, all males, or all females, 
or some of each sex. Now as these consecutive propagations 
must have succeeded each other at intervals not less than 0, 
the total infinite succession of such propagations must be 
dispersed over a tract of duration which is not less than a 
tract consisting of the same infinite multitude of periods, 
each equal to 0. But such a tract cannot be finite ; for if 
any finite period be proposed, we can surpass it merely by 
a finite multitude of periods, each equal to 0. These con- 
secutive propagations must therefore have extended through 
all pre-existing duration ; and therefore the human race and 
the habitable earth must have existed from eternity ; — and 
this is the second point of the difficulty. 

Art. 11. I shall designate hereafter, as an Issuary Line, 
every such series of pre-existing parents, as described in 
Art. 10, whether all males, all females, or some of each sex. 

Art. 12. So far as the existence of an issuary line is ex- 
tended over any tract of duration, it exists unbroken through 
such tract ; that is, at every poi?it of time throughout such 
tract of duration, one individual, at least, of that issuary 
line must be living. For, since the parent must be alive, 
at least, 7ip to the moment of conception, the existence of such 
parent continues, at least, until that of the offspring begins. 

Art. 13. By a similar process of reasoning to that of Art. 
7, we may prove, that the greatest multitude of human beings 
that have ever, even for a single moment, coexisted on the 



earth, is a finite number, which denote by S. The same is 
also demonstrable otherwise, without scriptural authority, 
from the finite magnitude of the earth. 

Art. 14. Now take a rank of the progenitors of Z, whose 
multitude is equal to ,u , so that .^ shall be greater than S. 
The existence of each individual of that rank, presupposes 
tioo issuary lines, totally distinct from each other ; namely, 
the male and the female ; and by Arts. 10 and 12, these 
lines have eternally pre-existed nnbroken ; and by a bare in- 
spection of Blackstone's Table, or of the alphabetic diagram 
in page 5 of this Letter, it will appear that all the individu- 
als of each rank are traced in his theory, from distinct issuary 
lines. Therefore the existence of that rank whose multitude 
is u, presupposes the existence of twice that number of issu- 
ary lines, totally distinct and eternally pre-existing un- 
broken. 

Of the aforesaid rank, select one individual, whose first 
mometit of existence was earlier, or else not later, than that 
of any of the other individuals of the said rank ; and denote 
that moment of time by m. Now, if any other individual 
of that rank were not begun to exist at the moment m ; yet, 
because his two issuary lines had pre-existed eternal and 
unbroken, then, of each of those lines some individual was 
living at m; and therefore, for every individual of the said 
rank, who had not begun to exist at the moment m, two 
other individuals must have existed instead ; and therefore 
the total multitude of persons coexisting at m, must be, at 
least, equal to u; but ^t is greater than ^; therefore that 
multitude of persons must be greater than ^; that is, a 
greater multitude of persons coexisted o?i the earth at the 
moment m, than the greatest which has ever coexisted on 
the earth at any moment — which is absurd ; — and this is 
the third point of the difficulty. 

Art. 15. The manifest absurdity of these results has not 
altogether escaped notice down to the present time. In 
Dean's American edition of Blackstone, one of the annota- 
2 



10 

tors, in a note annexed to Book II. Chap. XIV. No. 203, has 
remarked some of these results, and suggested a principle, 
the application of which, he conceives, will enable us to 
escape them. This principle, which he seems to regard as 
an anchor of infallible stability, is — " the intermarriage of 
relatives." 

Art. 16. It is almost astonishing that men of discriminat- 
ing judgment and exercised mind will, on some occasions, 
without resistance, bow the understanding to a gross and 
contemptible delusion. A moment's reflection might have 
informed this annotator, that mere marriage of relations can, 
by no possibility, relieve us from the difficulties attached to 
this theor]/". For, in the case of any two such relatives who 
may marry together, let us ask the question — how are they 
related ? The relationship must be either that of brother 
and sister^ under which designation I now include half- 
hrother and half-sister, so called, or else it must be a relation- 
ship of some other kind. In the former case, the persons 
connected in marriage have a total or palatial identity of pa- 
rents ; in the latter case the two parents of .the husband are 
persons totally distinct from those of the wife. And, there- 
fore, so long as we disallow the marriage of brothers and 
sisters, since evei^y married couple inust have had four pa- 
rents, the tiDofold ascending progression, maintained in Black- 
stone's theory, receives no check from the consanguinity of ' 
husband and wife, and all the objections and difficulties aris- 
ing from the multitude of progenitors remain precisely as 
before. 

But if the annotator's " intermarriage of relatives " be 
supposed to extend to the case of brother and sister, what a 
field of horrors opens to the view ! We encounter the fear- 
ful contemplation of scenes that appal humanity. No isola- 
ted case of necessity meets the view, but a continual stream 
of pollution. For, be it carefully remembered, that, if ive 
first ascend, for any length whatever in the line of progeni- 
tors, and afterwards exclude from the pre-existing genera- 



11 

tions all supposition of marriage of brother and sister, the 
twofold progression of Blackstone's theorj'" has been only 
retarded up to that stage, and will then begin to operate 
with all its absurdities as before. And, therefore, admitting 
that we forbear the supposition of incestuous marriage, as 
far hack as possible ; that is, till the multitude of progeni- 
tors become barely recojicilahle with knoion fact, we shall 
then be compelled to iiitroduce that supposition, and contifiu- 
ally reapply it, up to the first wan. Tlie proposed remedy 
of the annotator presents, therefore, on the one hand, a mere 
idle nullity, and, on the other, a deluge of abominations. 

Art, 17. The progress and tenor of these reasonings lead 
me opportunely and directly to consider the fourth circum- 
stance of difficulty attached to Blackstone's theory, which 
Sir William Blackstone has himself expressly noticed in the 
same chapter. No. 205 ; and which he has attempted to over- 
come by the application of this identical principle, which I 
have considered in the last foregoing Articles, namely, the 
intermarriage of relatives. I shall now therefore examine 
the nature of this new difficulty, with a view to ascertain 
how far it admits of a successful and remedial application of 
the said principle. 

Art. 18. The difficulty to which I allude occurs in the 
case of collateral consanguinity. Sir William Blackstone 
shows, that, by an extremely moderate, and, in fact, una- 
voidable average estimation, each individual in any genera- 
tion is the parent of tioo individuals in the succeeding gene- 
ration, and that hence we are compelled to infer, prima facie, 
from his table of lineal consanguinity, that, by average esti- 
mation, each individual of any generation has one brother or 
sister, that is, one collateral of the first degree ; and also 
four first cousins, that is, collaterals of the second degree ; 
and also sixteen second cousins, that is, collatej'als of the 
third degree ; and so on, increasing by a fourfold ratio at each 
ascending step. From this he concludes, that, of any one 
generation, every individual must have nearly two hundred 



12 

and seventy onillions of co-existing collateral relations in the 
fifteenth degree ; on which he makes the following remark ; 
" And if this calculation should appear incompatible with the 
number of inhabitants on the earth, it is because, by inter- 
marriages among the several descendants from the same an- 
cestor, a hundred or a thousand modes of consanguinity may 
be consolidated in one person, or he may be related to us a 
hundred or a thousand different ways." 

Art. 19. One of the annotators gives, in emphatic lan- 
guage, his decided opinion, that " the learned judge's reason- 
ing is just and correct " on this case ; and, in express terms, 
he distinctly assents to both parts of that reasoning, namely, 
the first calculation of the multitude of collaterals, and the 
" reducing " influence of the " intermarriage of relatives." 

Art. 20. Now I shall attempt to show, in the following 
Articles, that the " learned judge's reasoning is " neither 
"just" nor "correct," and that the "learned annotator" 
might well be suspected of having, with obstinate and blind 
stupidity, sold himself to absurdity^ for the sake of treading 
in the steps of the " learned judge." 

Art. 21 These objects I shall undertake to accomplish in 
the following manner. I shall take some cases of collateral 
consanguinity, in which this "intermarriage of relatives" 
shall be assumed, and supposed to exist, to its utmost possible 
extent, short of incestuous connection ; and if, after all al- 
lowance made for its operation, the difficulty be not removed, 
I shall then presume to infer that the " learned judge's rea- 
soning is " not " correct." 

Art. 22. By average estimation, my father and my mother 
have, each of them, one brother or sister, and each of these 
two has two children, which gives me four first cousins, con- 
formably to Blackstone's theory. Again, my father and my 
mother have, each of them, four first cousins, making eight 
persons, whose children are my second cousins, whence, by 
allowance of two children to each of those eight persons, I 
have sixteen second cousins, which is again conformable to 



13 

Blackstone's theory, and so on. But, as the ^annotator ob- 
serves, this proceeds on the supposition, that no person mar- 
ries a relation. We shall now therefore try the amount of 
diminution wrought upon these numbers by the practice of 
such intermarriages to the greatest admissible extent. De- 
signate as A and a, the two persons, whereof one is brother 
or sister to my father, and the other is brother or sister to my 
mother. Let A and a be male and female, and marry to- 
gether. Then the two children of A, and the two children of a 
are no longer two distinct pairs of children, but one pair only, 
who are my first cousins ; in this case, therefore, instead of 
having four first cousins, I have only two. Again ; by the 
same circumstance of intermarriage, suppose my father to 
have only two first cousins, and m^y mother only two ; and 
in order to allow, in every admissible case, a continual inter- 
marriage, suppose those four persons to be tioo males and 
two females, denoting the males by A and B, and the fe- 
males by a and h ; and suppose that A and a marry to- 
gether, and also B and b. The assumed average offspring 
of these two marriages will be four persons, who are my 
second cousins. Thus the number of second cousins is now 
reduced from sixteen to four. In like manner, by this con- 
tinual intermarriage, the number of third cousins will be 
found reducible from sixty-four to eight, and that of the 
fourth cousin from tioo hundred and fifty-six to sixteen, and 
so on. Having, therefore, in this reduced order of things, 
one brother or sister, tivo first cousins, four second cousins, 
eight third cousins, &i'c., it appears that after all admissible 
reduction resulting from continual intermarriage, I have one 
collateral of the first degree, two of the second degree, four 
of the third degree, eight of the fourth, and so on, by a 
two-fold progression corresponding precisely to that of lineal 
ascent. 

Art. 23. Hence it appears, that, after all admissible reduc- 
tion by intermarriage, I have now more than A BILLION 
of collateral relations in the forty-first degree ! 



14 

Art. 24. Now, therefore, let me ask, where is the expect- 
ed refuge from the weight of its own absurdity, which the 
resource of intermarriage was presumed to create in favor 
of Blackstone's lineal theory ? By the application of that 
resource, he has merely shifted hack the difficulty to a higher 
degree in the table. He has unconsciously adopted the last 
expedient of the vanquished man ; he has invoked Procras- 
tination to his aid. If a man who dreads an inundation of 
the Nile should cut a canal, which enables him to drain 
away half or more than half of the waters of the river, 
his personal security is not increased, if he have left in the 
main channel water etiough to drown him. And this is pre- 
cisely the case of Blackstone's theory. 

Art. 25. I must now notice another observation made by 
the annotator, to whom I have referred in Art. 19. 

Art. 26. In the same note, he gives a case, in which, 
from two married couples placed on an uninhabited island, 
a continual posterity may be derived without incestuous con- 
nection, yet never amounting to more than two individuals 
in each generation. 

Art. 27. The annotator states that fact, either, firstly, to 
instruct and benefit his readers by the bare knowledge of the 
fact ; or, secondly, by such fact intending to remove the diffi- 
culties of Blackstone^s theory. 

Art. 28. If the former of these two objects was that of 
the annotator, for my part, I can only say, that he has told 
me nothing new ; and others, of course, can answer for them- 
selves, if they consider the inquiry a matter of sufficient im- 
portance. 

Art. 29. But if the latter was the object of the annota- 
tor, he has indeed most miserably failed. What should we 
think of the argumentative skill of the man, who, if closely 
beset by the ingenious fallacy of some sophist, professing to 
prove that swow is SZacA:, should answer; ^^ your argument 
undoubtedly contains tio flaw ; yet I can bring another ar- 
gument showing that snow is white ; and I therefore maintain 



15 

it to be white." We all know that, in such a case, he ought 
to say ; '' there must be a fiaw in your argument, although 
I am 7iot able to find it ; for I know, from other more obvious 
a7id plain arguments, that snoio is lohite.'^ 

Art. 30. In this case, however, he could not be said, in 
the argumentative sense, to have ansioered the sophist's ar- 
gument, as he had fiot detected its flaw. 

Art. 31. But should he attempt, with yet greater extrav- 
agance, by connecting and incorporating his own argument 
with that of the opposite party, to vindicate, establish, and 
explain the latter ; what words can represent the magnitude 
of his absurdity ! 

Art. 32. Now, that all the absurd results of Blackstone's 
theory are not necessary facts, we can as easily ascertain, as 
that snow is luhite ; for, in order to ascertain it, we have 
only to trace a descending posterity from any presupposed 
limited number of original ancestors, and show, that, in pro- 
cess of time, the amount might equal or exceed our existing 
population ; for thus we perceive, that, instead of an eternal 
innumerable ancestry, we may all have proceeded from some 
such limited number of ancestors. But, Blackstone's theory, 
in tracing the ascending ranks of progenitors, infers this 
eternal, infinite ancestry ; and therefore, like the sophist's 
argument, we should rather be admonished of the falsehood 
of his theory, by its plaifi contradiction of a knoion fact, 
than attempt, as the annotator has done, to urge that fact in 
explanation and defence of the theory. 

Art. 33. Perhaps the best elucidation which this topic 
will conveniently admit, before I dismiss it, may be found in 
the following quotation from Whatehfs Logic, in the Ap- 
pendix, No. II, Case 97, the subject of that case being one 
of those curious fallacies which pretend to disprove the reali- 
ty of motion. " Aldrich mistakes the character of the diffi- 
culty ; which is not to prove the truth of that which is 
self-evident, but to explain an apparent demonstration mili- 
tating against that which nevertheless no one ever doubted. 



16 

He (Aldrich) says in this case, * solvitur ambulando : ' but 
(pace tanti viri) this is no solution at all, but is the very 
thing which constitutes the difficulty in question ; for it is 
precisely because we know the possibility of motion, that a 
seeming proof of its impossibility produces perplexity." 

Art. 34. I have now, Sir, carefully represented the sev- 
eral insuperable difficulties, which encumber Blackstone's 
theory, and shown the failure of the attempts, which have 
been made by himself and by others, to overcome them. I 
might now be expected to proceed immediately to the task of 
detecting the fallacious frinciple involved w the theory — or, 
in other words, of solving the fallacy ; but I hope to pursue 
a more beneficial and instructive course, by not immediately 
proceeding to accomplish that object. For, undoubtedly, our 
time is not unprofitably spent upon any subject, when we 
continue to examine it in every accessible , situation, till we 
have carefully considered it in all its important points ; and 
under that conviction, I shall undertake some additional in- 
vestigations of Blackstone's theory, before I proceed in search 
of its essential flaw. Indeed it may be not unreasonably 
said ; " although the attempts hitherto made in defence of 
Blackstone's theory have been found to fail ; we are not yet 
absolutely sure that no argumentative resources exist, by 
which it might be successfully defended, either totally, or 
partially at least ; and therefore, before undertaking a sum- 
onary conviction, a more liberal proceeding would be — to 
inquire with candid punctuality — how much might be said 
in its defence." With such a sentiment I cheerfully concur, 
and shall therefore, in the following Articles, proceed accord- 
ingly. 

Art. 35. First, then, we shall make an attempt for the 
relief of Blackstone's theory, by correcting a supposition 
which he seems to have inadvertently taken for granted, or 
else to have passed without notice. 

Art. 36. That supposition is, that all the progenitors of 
the Propositus in the same rank must, at some Tnoment of 



17 

time have coexisted on the earth. This is true of no rank 
except the tioo parents of the Propositus ; as will easily 
appear thus. Denoting the Propositus by Z, represent his 
father and mother by Y and y ; his grandfather and grand- 
mother maternal by X and x, and -paternal by W and w. 
Suppose that Z is now twenty years old, and that his birth 
occurred one year after the marriage of Y and y. Suppose 
y to have been seventeen years old at the time of her mar- 
riage, and born one year after the marriage of her parents X 
and X ; and, at the time of such marriage, suppose X to have 
been twenty years old, and x to have been nineteen ; and 
admit both to be living still. Allowing nine months for ges- 
tation, we are sure that, sixty years ago, X was not in exis- 
tence ; and fifty-nine years ago, x was not in existence. 
Suppose also that Y, at his marriage with y, was forty-eight 
years old ; that his mother w died in giving him birth, and 
that his father W survived his mother five years only. Then, 
of the four grand parents, W, w, X, and x, during the in- 
terval from sixty-nine to sixty-four years ago, W alone was 
in being on the earth ; during that from sixty-four years ago 
to somewhat less than sixty, none of the four was in terres- 
trial existence ; for one year afterwards, of all four, X alone 
had such existence ; and since that time, X and x have, with- 
out intermission, coexisted on the earth, while W and w, 
have been deceased. Thus at no moment of time, have W, 
w, X and x, been all in existence on the earth. 

Art. 37. But after all due notice and allowance of this 
consideration, the inflexible and stubborn difficulties of Black- 
stone's theory remain as before, totally unshaken, unassailed, 
and undisturbed. 

Art. 38. That such consideration has no relevant effect 
whatever on the thii^d difficulty, has already appeared from 
Art. 14, where we have seen that any effect, which could re- 
sult from the interference of that consideration, could be only 
such as to make the matter worse ; since, for every one mem- 
ber of any rank, not coexisting simultaneously with senior 
3 



18 

members of the same rank, the place of that one individual 
may be supplied by two others, that is, one from each of the 
two distinct pre-existing issuary lines, the male and the fe- 
male ; and thus, in every such case, the multitude of coex- 
isting per so7is is increased; and, by the continual reduplica- 
tion of previous generations, this present augmentation is 
extended and diffused, with accumulating influence, through 
all pre-existing eternity. And if, in any rank of collaterals, 
we take the last moment of the last surviving member of the 
rank, and substitute for every other member one or more of 
his offspring or posterity, we obtain a multitude of coexisting 
persons not less than before ; which proves, in a similar man- 
ner, that such consideration has no diminishing effect on the 
fourth difficulty. 

It is almost needless to obser\^e, that, in respect of the 
second difficulty, the aforesaid consideration is equally inef- 
fectual. For, as the theory of Blackstorie infers, by necessi- 
ty, a perpetual chain of prior generations ; and as the com- 
mencement of the existence of certain individuals of each 
preceding generation must, from the nature of the human 
constitution, have been prior to that of the existence of cer- 
tain members of the succeeding one, by an interval of time 
which is not less than a certain assignable period ; then this 
perpetual chain of generations supposes a perpetual chain of 
intervals, which is not less than a perpetual chain of such 
assigned equal periods ; and which, therefore, independently 
of all considerations respecting the coexistence of other per- 
sons, must extend backward, as was proved in Art. 10, 
through all pre-existing eternity. 

Art. 39. And, in respect of the first difficulty, the fact is 
even yet more obviously inanifest, that such difficulty is no- 
wise affected by the aforesaid consideration. For that diffi- 
culty relates to the total 'multitude of human beings, which 
may be inferred, by Blackstone's theory, through pre-exist- 
ing duration, to have ever existed on the earth, without any 
regard to the order of their coexistence ; and because, in what- 
ever order those beings may have coexisted, the twofold pro- 



19 

gression pursued to the same extent backward, will make 
the same sum total, the difficulty is nowise affected by such 
order of coexistence. 

Art. 40. I shall now inquire whether a person maintaining 
atheistical opinions, and consequently discrediting the Mosaic 
records, and caring nothing for the first two difficulties, or 
rather not regarding them as difficulties at all, could erect 
any plausible defence against the other difficulties. Now, in 
respect of the fourth difficulty, such an individual might 
profess to believe that the population of the earth is daily 
diminishing, whereby the inference of a numerous host of 
collaterals might be avoided, and the force of the difficulty 
weakened : for, if possessed of sufficient effrontery to main- 
tain that the average offspring is only one child from every 
married couple, the average result would be that no individ- 
ual has any collateral kindred. And indeed some feeble color 
might be given to such an assertion, by referring to the case 
of populous nations of remote antiquity, now totally extinct, 
lohich inhabited countries ?ioiv thinly peopled or not at all; 
of which facts many indubitable traces are discoverable on 
the American continent, and perhaps elsewhere. Therefore, 
with sufficient hardihood, such person might, with some loss, 
effect an escape from the fourth difficulty. I say, loith some loss; 
for in this case he is compelled, by denying the fundamental 
principle of that part of Blackstone's theory, which relates 
to collaterals, to abandon, as without foimdation, that part of 
his theory, in order to preserve the other part, which relates 
to lijieal kindred. 

Art. 41. I shall now inquire with what success this athe- 
istical reasoner might make his defence against the third 
difficulty. 

Art. 42. By a reference to Art. 13, we shall perceive, that, 
in the argumentative induction of the third difficulty, we 
essentially involve the proposition, that, the greatest multi- 
tude of coexisting persons, ever upon the earth, must have been 
a finite multitude. Now if the only demonstration of this 



20 

proposition were that Ghtainahle from the authority of Moses, 
as in Art. 7, the atheistical objector might, with consistency, 
despise that authority, and reject the demonstration, and, for 
want of such demonstration, rejecting the involved proposi- 
tion, he might, in consequence, reject the luhole induction, 
and refuse to acknowledge the existence of the difficulty. But, 
as remarked in Art. 13, the said involved proposition is not only 
demonstrable, as in Art. 7, but also, independently of that, 
from the finite capacity of the earth. It will now appear, on 
a careful re-examination of Art. 14, that no other part of the 
reasoning employed in it is at all susceptible of contradiction 
or dispute. Here, then, the atheistical objector's attempts at 
resistance must have an end ; nothing noio can destroy his 
embarrassment. For, let us imagine, that, in order to afford 
him the greatest possible facilities compatible with his present 
situation, we allow him to seek, in foreign connections, that 
multitude of progenitors which the soil of Britain cannot 
supply to the British Propositus. This resource will be of 
no avail. For if the twofold reascending series, in the very 
commencement of its retrogressive career through the dusky 
tract of antiquity, treads with a few gigantic steps beyond 
the shores and population of Britain — with more fearful 
rapidity and resistless accumulation, will it shortly sweep the 
boundaries and exhaust the prolific powers of the habit- 
able earth. For the sake of illustration, however, let us, in 
imagination, accompany the supposed atheistical reasoner in 
his laborious excursions to and fro, to reassemble the scattered 
multitudes of the departed progenitors of the Propositus. 
Firstly, then, we revisit many distant climes, and examine 
the connubial connections of civilized and barbarous Europe, 
of savage and illustrious Asia, voluptuous and desolate Africa, 
and renowned and unexplored America. We trace the old 
alSnities and remote prolific ties betwixt the ruthless Vandal 
of the north and the grim Patagonian of the southern pole : 
betwixt the Mongol Tartar and the Briton ; the rovers of the 
sultry Arabian desert, and the wandering warriors of the 



21 

dreary American forest ; we pursue the matrimonial mazy 
labyrinth among the mansions of the Norman, the Saxon, 
and the Roman, through the rude and rustic tenements of 
the Gael, the stately structures of the Greek, the uncouth 
dens of the Lapland savage, the huts of the Negro, the 
domiciles of the unsocial Chinese, and the decorated fabrics 
of the Mexican, to find progenitors for the British Proposi- 
tus ; and when all this has been done, we have clone nothing 
to the purpose; we have merely started on our way ; we have 
barely begun to trace the interlineal everlasting thread over 
eternity unlimited and space unbounded ; we have left the 
confines of the earth in quest of the multitudinous legions 
of his countless kindred ; and our next inevitable step is to 
discover a few insignificant millions of a remnant of his family 
among the inhabitants of the moon. 

Art. 43. Thus it appears, that so long as we endeavor to 
resist the inductions of this theory, by first conceditig the 
fundamental data which sustain it, and afterwards attempt- 
ing to check the conclusions by other considerations^ we may 
anticipate eventual confusion and defeat. Perhaps no human 
speculation, that has ever existed, will furnish a better illus- 
tration than that which is afforded by Blackstone's theory, 
of the import of the celebrated maxim, — "(5o? nov cuo, y.al ri,v yfjv 
xiv^aw." " Give me a standing-place, and. I will move the 
earth." For so long as the initial premises of Blackstone's 
theory are conceded, no intellectual ipower can arrest the 
progress of the argument, or disturb the stability of the con- 
clusions. 

Art. 44. But, after all the time and labor which might be 
consumed in such an experiment, we shall find it an extreme- 
ly simple, and almost an infantine task to rectify in toto these 
paradoxical conclusions, by directing our operations to a sin- 
gle fundamefital principle of this theory. 

Art. 45. One of Blackstone's annotators, while he disallows 
the results of this theory, admits its calculations to be " right 
in numbers.^^ And Blackstone himself, speaking of the great 



22 

number of ancestors, which, back to the twentieth degree, 
without an admission of incestuous connection, he conceives 
that every individual must have, considers that conclusion to 
be a fact which ''-common arithmetics^ will '■^demonstrate.''^ 
Now, perhaps to the surprise of many persons, the fact will 
appear to be, in the case of these gentlemen, that, the whole 
original error of each lay in rashly adopti?ig these two sup- 
positions. The ensuing articles will soon show, that Black- 
stone's theory is not " right in numbers,''' and that " common 
arithmetic" vj\\\ not " demonstrate" its conclusions. 

Art. 46. It is not true, that, in tracing the progenitors of 
any Propositus, and excluding all supposition of incestuous 
connection, the multitude of each preceding rank must be 
doubled. It undoubtedly is true till we ascend to the two 
grandsires and tivo grandmothers of the Propositus, but — 
it is true no farther. This will easily appear by the sub- 
joined Formula, where, as before, a capital letter and its 
corresponding stnall letter denote husband and wife. 

Uu Vv 
. Ww Xx 
' Yy 

Z 

Now let W and x be brother and sister, being children of U 
and u ; and also let X and w be brother and sister, being 
children of V and v. Now there is no incestuous connec- 
tion in the marriage of W and w, nor in that of X and x ; 
and these persons are four in number ; and the number of 
their parents, U, u, V, v, is also four ; • — instead of being 
eight, as Blackstone's theory would infer. The same result 
might be otherwise obtained by supposing W and X to be 
brothers, being children of U and u ; and w and x to be sis- 
ters, being children of Y and v. Now the same thing might 
be repeated in the case of U, u, V, v, and again repeated in 
the case of the next preceding rank of parents ; and so as 
far back as we please. And in order to avoid the twofold 



23 

increase of t!ie ranks, we are not at all compelled to limit 
each rank to four persons; on the other hand, any rank 
whatever may comprehend the whole multitude, which, in 
Blackstone's theory, it is supposed to do ; and yet, by the 
circumstance of interlineage, now explained, the several 
amounts of the preceding ranks may be diminished to any 
amount tiot less than four ; and also the amounts of the sev- 
eral ranks may fluctuate continually, increasing above and 
diminishing down to four ; as will appear by another for- 
mula. This other formula will require, from its greater 
length, some additional explanatory notation. For that pur- 
pose, we shall consider every combination of a capital letter 
with its corresponding small letter, to represent, as before, 
a Quarried couple ; and, in each rank, we shall designate the 
couple which stands on the left extremity of that rank, as 
the first couple of that rank ; and that which stands imme- 
mediately on the right hand of it, as the second couple of 
that rank ; and so on to the right extremity of the rank. 
Also, a numeral annexed to any letter shall specify from 
what couple, in the rank next above, the person represented 
by that letter, is descended. Thus, in the subjoined formula, 
the numeral 3, annexed to the letter M, intimates that M is 
the offspring of the couple K, k, in the rank next above. And 
here we may observe, that, by this notation, we may discover 
in a moment, whether any incestuous coiinection be supposed 
in the formula, by simply examining whether both individ- 
uals of any married couple have the same numeral annexed ; 
for, if not, no incest, in their case, can exist. 
&c. &c. &c. &c. 
C c D d 
E'l e'2 F'2f'l G'lg'2 H'2 h'l 
I'li'2 J'3 j'4 K'l k'4 
L'11'2 M'Sm'l N'2n'3 O'l o'2 P'3p'l a'2q'3 R'l r'2 
S'l s'2 T'3 t'l U'4 u'5 V'6 v'7 
W'l w'2 X'3 x'4 
Y'l y'2 
Z 



24 

Art. 47. Thus it appears, that, instead of an eternal and 
innumerable ancestry, we can trace the lineage of the Pro- 
positus, at any reascending stage, back to two couples. And 
without any intrinsic absurdity, we might suppose, in a 
former age, two such original couples, both created by the 
Deity ; but such a supposition is expressly discountenanced 
by the testimony of the Sacred Scriptures. By admission, 
therefore, of the marriage of brother and sister, in the solitary 
case of these two couples, we trace the family of the Pro- 
positus, back to the Jirst human pair. 

Art. 48. Thus, by the simple rejection of the groundless 
and idle supposition of a twofold reascending progression, 
I have relieved Blackstone's theory from its extravagant and 
palpable absurdities, contradictory to common sense, and hos- 
tile to divine revelation. 

Having now. Sir, accomplished the proposed object of this 
Letter, 1 might, without inconsistency, immediately termi- 
nate my remarks ; but a secret impulse, not strictly definable, 
moves me onward a few additional degrees. For — if I totally 
relinquish here the investigation of the subject examined in 
this letter, 1 shall be haunted in the visions of nocturnal slum- 
ber by the fantastic image of some presumptuous blasphemer, 
directing the finger of scorn to me and my religious creed, 
and attracting notice to what he may stigmatize as " that 
•primeval act of crime whereon the Christian mathematician 
dares not hazard a remark.^' 

In order. Sir, to prevent the actual and real representation 
of this disgraceful imaginary scene, I shall proceed, in the 
following Articles, to offer some considerations on the case of 
the first two connubial connections of the offspring of Adam 
ajid Eve. 

Art. 1. Some objects/we designate agreeable or desirable; 
by which we mean, that we love the presence and possession 
of those objects, or, in other words, they exercise an attrac- 
tive influence on the human will; for example, flowers, 



precious minerals, &c. This class of objects we shall de- 
note by the capital letters, as A, B, C, D, &c. 

Art. 2. Other objects we call disagreeable, hateful, &c., 
of which we dislike the presence, and which exercise a re- 
pulsive influence on the will. These we shall denote by 
small letters, as a, b, c, d, &c. 

Art. 3. Other objects again may be totally indifferent, 
being such that we neither like nor dislike them. If there 
be any objects which are strictly of this class, we may de- 
note them by the small Greek letters, as «, ^, y, &c. The 
influence of such objects on the will, may evidently be rep- 
resented by zero. 

Art. 4. If any rank of the objects. A, B, C, D, &c., be 
presented in array before any individual, on condition that he 
may take, and retain, owe, and only one of them ; when such 
individual makes his choice, he simply obeys the strongest 
attraction. 

Art. 5. But if objects of each contrary class, as A, a, B, b, 
C, c, &c., with or without any of the inditferent objects, 
«, p, y, (fcc, be connected in a cluster by an itiseparable string, 
and that cluster be introduced to the presence of any indi- 
vidual, with liberty and power to remove it, neglect it, or 
take it ; if the first alternative be realized, we plainly per- 
ceive, that, in this case, the sum total of the several repul- 
sive influences has exceeded that of the others ; if the third 
alternative occur, the case is reversed ; but if the second al- 
ternative be that which is realized, the two sums are exactly 
equal. 

Art 6. In the case of the first or third alternative, in 
which one sum exceeds the other, I shall denote such excess 
by the expression — prevalent amount ; and in each several 
cluster, wherein such excess may be found to exist, I shall 
call that excess, the prevalent amount of that cluster. 

Art. 7. Now, if several such clusters be set in array, in 
the presence of any individual, under a necessity to select and. 
take one and o?ily one of them; then, if the prevalent 
4 



26 

amount of one cluster be attractive, and those of the res 
all repulsive, that one will be selected ; if two or more such 
prevalent amounts be attractive, the selecting individual will 
take that which has the greatest prevalent amount attractive ; 
but if all those amounts be repulsive, he will take that which 
has the least prevalent amount repulsive ; thus the selected 
cluster may, in general language, be declared to be, either 
that which has the greatest prevalent avnount attractive, or 
that which has the least prevalent amoimt repulsive. 

Art. 8. The state, situation, or mangier of life of any 
individual may be considered as the cluster of circumstances 
which surround him. And I have no need of demonstrating 
the painful truth to human beings, that when those cases 
occur in which we have an opportunity to make a selection 
of circumstances, we are compelled to select them, not sepa- 
rately and singly, but in the cluster ; we may choose to be 
in this or in that situation ; but we have no power to select 
each particular circumstance at pleasure, and, hy connecting 
them together, to make a situation for ourselves. 

Art. 9. Through all the extent of eternity, if any moment 
be taken, I shall designate the total order a7id state of all 
things then existing, as the Perisystem of that moment, and 
the total perpetual series of such successive perisystems, ex- 
tending through all the past and the future eternity, I shall 
designate as the Diasystem of eternity. 

Art. 10. Thus any one perisystem may be regarded as an 
infinite cluster of circumstances ; but a diasystetn is an infi- 
nitely more vast and co7nprehensive cluster ; being, in fact, 
an infinite cluster of such clusters. 

Art. 11. Attempting with humility the investigation of 
things indescribably beyond us, it seems to be maintainable, 
that in any diasystem or perisystem, real or imaginable, the 
innumerable circumstances which compose it are, in certain 
separate parcels, connected hy necessity together ; so that, 
from such diasystem or perisystem, if one circumstance be 
removed, a certain parcel of other circumstances will also be 



27 

removed ; and vice versa, if one additional circumstance be 
introduced, it will, by a like necessity, be accompanied by a 
certain Qiiultitude of others. 

Art. 12. We have strong intimations in the aspect of na- 
ture, and positive and plain testimony in the volumes of di- 
vine revelation, that such necessity, to a certain degree, is 
co-immutable and co-eternal with Divine Majesty, and His 
counsels are directed and determined conformably thereto ; 
that is, of all possible diasystems, that one has been selected 
which contains the greatest prevalent amount of that ivhich 
is ^^ good in His sight ;'''' — and yet that very same diasys- 
tem which contains, by preponderance, the greatest quantity 
of good is mixed with a quantity of evil. 

Art. 13. The truth of this proposition is, even vjithout the 
authority of the Scriptures, to all intelligent persons who 
acknowledge a Deity, very apparent. For, in the arrange- 
ment and order of the created world, we have copious evi- 
dence that what we call benevoleiice, is a prominent feature, 
so to speak, in the character of the Deity. He everywhere 
appears, in all His works, like a kijid landlord who had care- 
fully studied the comforts of those that were intended to 
occupy the tenements which He constructed for their habita- 
tion. He appears to be One that would never visit or alflict 
the humblest of His creatures with a single momentary pang 
of discomfort or distress, for the sake of any enjoyment or 
gratification resulting to Hi7n from such a circumstance ; and 
yet it may be asked ; " Why is there such a quantity of pain 
and distress in the world ? Why are we incessantly beset 
by the racking tortures of corporeal privation and disease ? 
And why are the inferior and brutal tribes arrayed against 
each other in perpetual predatory war, when the Almighty 
Caterer might have extended the vegetative bounties of the 
earth to all ? " The only general answer which can be 
given to these questions and all of a similar nature is ; that, 
if the system of things were so altered as to exclude these 
evil circumstances, that altered system would not produce the 
greatest prevalent amount of good. 



28 

Art. 14. And in the case of what is called moral evil, 
the same thing may be said. Suppose, for example, the fol- 
lowing question to be put. " Why, at some retnote and early 
•period of the diasystem, has the Deity suffered the train of 
causes and effects, and the course and progress of concomi- 
tant events, to he such, that rebellious thoughts and machina- 
tions of malignity should spring and exist in some inferior 
spirit, and prompt him to disseminate mischief through 
every de'partment of the terrestrial creation'?'''' Or, instead 
of that question, take the following more obvious, though 
equivalent one. '' Why has the Deity ordered such a sys- 
tem of things, that we should be liable to moral evil and all 
its unhappy consequences ? Why were we not made, not 
only perfect, but infallible beings ? " The only possible an- 
swer is this ; that evey-y diasystem whatever, in which these 
alterations are supposed to have place, is yet less eligible than 
that which has been adopted ; because every such diasystem 
would eventuate with less prevalent amount of good. 

Art. 15. To those that understand and study the Scrip- 
tures, I need scarcely observe, that all the foregoing state- 
ments are expressly sanctioned in the sacred volume. I shall 
refer such persons, however, for the sake of prompt illustra- 
tion, to Romans v. 20, 21, ix. 17-23, xi. 12,25-36,- 
Exodus ix. 16; Isaiah xxxvii. 26; Ezekiel xxxviii. 16, 17, 
23. 

Art. 16. Now therefore, if the fact be, that fraternal nup- 
tials, in the days of Seth, involved the same intrinsic moral 
culpability which we know they involved in the days of 
Moses, from Leviticus xviii. 9, xx. 17; Deuteronomy xxvii. 
22, and elsewhere ; I say, in that case, our answer is ready 
concerning the case of such nuptials, being, in its general 
nature, the same answer which must be given respecting the 
existence of many other evil things and circumstances, 
namely ; that, if two human couples had been first created or 
any other system of thitigs adopted, whereby fraternal nup- 
tials would have been totally avoided, every such diasystem 



29 

wonld finally appear to be less eligible than that which has 
been adopted, because every such system, being connected, 
by necessity with some peculiar disadvajitages of which we 
are ignorant, would eventuate with less prevalent amount of 
good. 

Art. 17. I have said in the foregoing article, " if the fact 
be.'' My reason for inserting that clause is, that it appears 
to be questionable, whether such nuptials be not included in 
that very limited rank of cases, the moral culpability of which 
is created and destroyed by the sole force of vnere physical 
causes. 

Art. 18. The positive announcement of the existence of 
any such cases will probably surprise and startle some of my 
readers ; for a prompt and decisive demonstration of the fact, 
I refer them however to Leviticus xx. 18. 

Art. 19. The act which is there condemned, obtains its 
culpability, not from any infringement of personal j^ights or 
obligations, but from the sole fact of being performed under 
certain physical circumstances. 

Art. 20. That such an act is not merely indecorous but 
highly criminal, appears from the severity of the punishment 
annexed. 

Art. 21. But now I am encountered by the question, 
'"'■what reason can you assign, a priori, for supposing that 
fraternal nuptials belong to that rank of cases ? For, if no 
such reason can be given, such supposition must be a mere 
expedient, adopted in order to escape the difficulty.'''' This 
question I shall answer in the following Articles. 

Art. 22. Most other criminal acts derive their criminality 
from reasons of a metaphysical nature ; as, the infringement 
of personal rights or obligations, the misuse of our capaci- 
ties, the i?ifraction of the order of nature, &c. But fraternal 
nuptials cannot be shown to involve a culpability grounded 
on any of these reasons ; such culpability being attributable 
only to the physical circumstance of the kindred of the par- 
ties. 



30 

Art. 23. The expression, " filth," or, " uncleanliness," 
applied in the ordinary sense, to any quantity of matter, de- 
notes that such matter is in a certain chemical state which is 
disagreeable to the senses. 

Art. 24. That such matter has a greater hostility to the 
human constitution than that of repugjiance to the senses, 
will appear by considering that such matter is highly insalu- 
brious and poisonous. 

Art. 25. We may therefore affirm, that such matter and 
corporeal human persons are in a state of chemical antipa- 
thy. 

Art. 26. But yet we are aware, that in some cases, physi- 
cal causes, which operate on the human person may dim^inish 
or destroy such antipathy. Thus, in a state of famine, men 
have been sustained and refreshed by food which, in any 
other condition, would produce disease or death. 

Art. 27. The feeling of disgust, repugnance, and horror, 
which accompanies the contemplation of all those acts to 
which we attach the character of moral pollution, is a feel- 
ing superior in degree, hut extremely similar in its nature, 
to that which is described in Art. 23 ; and indicates therefore 
a superior degree of chemical aiitipathy betwixt hum,an per- 
sons, and such a state of tnaterial things as results from 
those acts of impurity. 

Art. 28. Of the similarity and close connexion between 
substantial and moral pollution, some remarkable and strik- 
ing indications may be found in the Scriptures. See Leviti- 
cus xi. 41 - 44, XX. 25 ; also Deuteronomy, xiv. 3, xxii. 5, 
xxiii. 12, 13, 14, and 18 ; Isaiah Ixvi. 17 ; also Exodus xxii. 
31 ; Leviticus xi. 39, 40, xvii. 15, xxii. 8 ; and in the New 
Testament, Acts xv. 28, 29. 

Art. 29. The existence and operation of such antipathy, 
in the case of the sexual union of living creatures closely 
connected by kindred, appears to be inferable from a curious 
fact which is known, I believe, in pathology ; namely ; that 
a continued repetitioji of such sexual unions, will deteriorate 
and impoverish the offspring. 



31 

Art. 30. Now the prolific appetite, or multiplying princi- 
ple, is one which pervades the human race like the appetite 
for food ; but counteracted in certain cases by the aforesaid 
antipathies, in the same manner as the appetite for food is 
also, in certain cases, counteracted by other antipathies, as 
noticed and explained in Arts. 23, 24, 25, 26. 

Art. 31. And, therefore, as in that case of two antagonist 
principles, when the principle of appetite becomes highly 
energetic, the antipathy is destroyed ; but on the abatement 
and dimimition of such energy, the antipathy revives ; so, in 
like manner, in the case of sexual pathology, if the prolific 
appetite be extremely energetic, the antipathy of kindred is 
destroyed ; but when such appetite is languid and feeble, 
the said antipathy takes effect, and springs into active opera- 
tion. 

Art. 32. Now another fact in pathology, and one which is 
demonstrable from the annals of history, is this ,• that, ccBteris 
paribus, in the human race, the prolific appetite is most highly 
energetic while the population are feio, and gradually dimin- 
ishes ivhile the populatioii expands ; thus resembling exactly 
the case of a coiled spring which is gradually suffered to 
unbend; in which, by the continual act of unbending, the 
unbending energy is gradually diminished and, lost. 

Art. 33. Thus the supposition is perfectly admissible and 
rational, that, in the days of Seth, while the prolific appetite 
of the human race was yet in the veheijience of its una- 
bated energy and vigor, the fraternal antipathies of sexual 
union had, as yet, no existence; and consequently no moral 
pollution attended such a connection. 

Art. 34. I am the more inclined to adopt this view of the 
case, from the nature of Abraham's nuptial connection with 
Sarah, which occurred soon after the flood, in a period of 
thin population ; and which, though it scarcely appears, in a 
strict sense, to be necessary, was one of that class of con- 
nections which was afterwards expressly forbidden. See 
Gen. XX. 12, and Deut. xxvii. 23. 





32 

Art. 35. It is observable, howev. 013 732 544 5 # 

youth, human society was yet unsettled, and terrestrial pop- 
ulation was disconnected and dispersed ; in which state of 
things, the formation of nuptial connections may have been 
attended with much practical difficulty ; and many such con- 
nections, though obtainable, may have been, from the moral 
depravity of the family of the female party, strongly ob- 
jectionable ; and therefore, to a certain extent, Abraham's 
marriage 7nay have been a case of necessity. 

Art. 36. Thus these nuptial connections of the first hu- 
man generation may, together with Abraham's case, be either 
considered as destitute of moral impurity, or else regarded as 
cases, whose impurity is merged^ in that superior necessity 
whereby a quantity of evil is attached to that system of 
things which eventuates in the greatest good. 



Having now, Sir, destroyed the insuperable difficulties and 
dispelled the embarrassing delusions which encumber Sir 
William Blackstone's genealogical theory ; and having shown, 
in the case of the Sacred Volume, that no objections of a 
similar kind are maintainable ; I conceive that my object is 
accomplished, and my labors have obtained a successful ter- 
mination ; finally, therefore, I subscribe myself, 

Sir, 
Very Respectfully, 

Your Obedient Servant, 
JOHN LEE. 



